There's a difference between being "willing" to pay something and not really having a choice, isn't there? Some people work from home, and therefore have no choice but to pay for "high speed" Internet... even if they are price gouged.

And then we have the really anti-competitive businesses like AT&T and Verizon, who somehow magically will all die fiery deaths in hell if they aren't allowed to place ridiculously low caps on usage and bill for overages at ludicrous rates. They use the mythical "bandwidth hog" as their example, trying to paint a false picture about others' greed and habits when it's simply their own greed and desire to screw consumers which have led to their pricing model.

I'm not a big fan of big government... I'm really not. And I don't like it when government passes a whole bunch of new laws that aren't really necessary. But in this case, I believe we're almost at a point where our government has somewhat of a duty to step in and begin treating broadband as a utility... just like electricity and water. If we're going to be stuck in a nation with little to no choice of "high speed" Internet providers in most areas, then consumers should be at least entitled to the same protections afforded to them when faced with other monopolies.